Outcome of diabetic foot osteomyelitis treated nonsurgically: a retrospective cohort study

Single-cell sequencing technology in skin wound healing

Skin wound healing is a complicated biological process that mainly occurs in response to injury, burns, or diabetic ulcers. It can also be triggered by other conditions such as dermatitis and melanoma-induced skin cancer. Delayed healing or non-healing after skin injury presents an important clinical issue; therefore, further explorations into the occurrence and development of wound healing at the cellular and molecular levels are necessary. Single-cell sequencing (SCS) is used to sequence and analyze the genetic messages of a single cell. Furthermore, SCS can accurately detect cell expression and gene sequences. The use of SCS technology has resulted in the emergence of new concepts pertaining to wound healing, making it an important tool for studying the relevant mechanisms and developing treatment strategies. This article discusses the application value of SCS technology, the effects of the latest research on skin wound healing, and the value of SCS technology in clinical applications. Using SCS to determine potential biomarkers for wound repair will serve to accelerate wound healing, reduce scar formation, optimize drug delivery, and facilitate personalized treatments.

Evaluating diagnostic tools, outcome measures and antibiotic approach in diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a scoping review and narrative synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a significant complication of diabetic foot disease; however, diagnosis remains challenging and treatment success is difficult to ascertain. Literature in this space that has utilized varying diagnostic criteria and ideal outcome measures for success is unclear.

AREAS COVERED

This scoping review assesses methods of diagnosis of DFO and definitions of treatment outcomes in the literature assessing antibiotic therapy for treatment of DFO.

EXPERT OPINION

There is a lack of consensus in the design of diabetic foot trials, resulting in difficulty for clinicians to assess and manage serious conditions such as DFO. The cure for DFO is challenging to ascertain and treatment failure may be a better approach to assess outcomes in research assessing the efficacy of antibiotic therapy. In the absence of gold-standard diagnostic tools, practical approaches to outcome assessment may allow for greater clinical applicability of available data.

Anaerobes in diabetic foot infections: pathophysiology, epidemiology, virulence, and management

SUMMARYDiabetic foot infections (DFI) are a public health problem worldwide. DFI are polymicrobial, biofilm-associated infections involving complex bacterial communities organized in functional equivalent pathogroups, all including anaerobes. Indeed, multiple pathophysiological factors favor the growth of anaerobes in this context. However, the prevalence, role, and contribution of anaerobes in wound evolution remain poorly characterized due to their challenging detection. Studies based on culture reviewed herein showed a weighted average of 17% of patients with anaerobes. Comparatively, the weighted average of patients with anaerobes identified by 16S rRNA gene sequencing was 83.8%. Culture largely underestimated not only the presence but also the diversity of anaerobes compared with cultivation-independent approaches but both methods showed that anaerobic Gram-negative bacilli and Gram-positive cocci were the most commonly identified in DFI. Anaerobes were more present in deeper lesions, and their detection was associated with fever, malodorous lesions, and ulcer depth and duration. More specifically, initial abundance of Peptoniphilus spp. was associated with ulcer-impaired healing, Fusobacterium spp. detection was significantly correlated with the duration of DFI, and the presence of Bacteroides spp. was significantly associated with amputation. Antimicrobial resistance of anaerobes in DFI remains slightly studied and warrants more consideration in the context of increasing resistance of the most frequently identified anaerobes in DFI. The high rate of patients with DFI-involving anaerobes, the increased knowledge on the species identified, their virulence factors, and their potential role in wound evolution support recommendations combining debridement and antibiotic therapy effective on anaerobes in moderate and severe DFI.

Antibiotic Eluting Bone Void Filler Versus Systemic Antibiotics For Pedal Osteomyelitis

Osteomyelitis complicates 20% of patients with infected diabetic foot ulcers. In this study, 2 strategies for treating pedal osteomyelitis were compared in a pilot study. This was a retrospective, non-randomized, single center 2 arm cohort study, conducted between 2020 and 2022 involving 53 patients at a tertiary limb salvage unit. All patients were managed with debridement and proximal bone biopsy. Group A was treated with systemic antibiotics for up to 6 weeks. Group B had vancomycin or gentamycin eluting bone void filler implanted into the diseased bone medullary cavity(s) and 1 week of oral antibiotics. Patients were followed independently for the primary endpoint of osteomyelitis treatment failure and secondary endpoints of amputation free survival, wound healing, minor amputation, and treatment-limiting side-effects. Survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference in treatment failure (p = .35) or amputation free survival (p = .46). Limb salvage rates were 88% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Wounds healed in 85% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Minor amputations occurred in 21% in Group A and 11% in Group B. Treatment limiting side effects occurred in 6% in Group A and were absent in Group B. In conclusion, the use of antibiotic eluting bone void filler appeared safe without extended systemic antibiotics in this study. Group B had fewer intravenous lines, requirement for home nursing, and treatment limiting side effects. A larger randomized controlled trial examining longer term clinical and radiological efficacy, treatment costs and side effects is warranted.

Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery 2023 guidelines on the diabetic foot

The diabetic foot interacts with anatomical, vascular, and neurological factors that challenge clinical practice. This study aimed to compile the primary scientific evidence based on a review of the main guidelines, in addition to articles published on the Embase, Lilacs, and PubMed platforms. The European Society of Cardiology system was used to develop recommendation classes and levels of evidence. The themes were divided into six chapters (Chapter 1 - Prevention of foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 2 - Pressure relief from foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 3 -Classifications of diabetic foot ulcers; Chapter 4 - Foot and peripheral artery disease; Chapter 5 - Infection and the diabetic foot; Chapter 6 - Charcot's neuroarthropathy). This version of the Diabetic Foot Guidelines presents essential recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with diabetic foot, offering an objective guide for medical practice.

Chronic Nonspinal Osteomyelitis in Adults: Consensus Recommendations on Percutaneous Bone Biopsies from the Society of Academic Bone Radiologists

The diagnosis and management of chronic nonspinal osteomyelitis can be challenging, and guidelines regarding the appropriateness of performing percutaneous image-guided biopsies to acquire bone samples for microbiological analysis remain limited. An expert panel convened by the Society of Academic Bone Radiologists developed and endorsed consensus statements on the various indications for percutaneous image-guided biopsies to standardize care and eliminate inconsistencies across institutions. The issued statements pertain to several commonly encountered clinical presentations of chronic osteomyelitis and were supported by a literature review. For most patients, MRI can help guide management and effectively rule out osteomyelitis when performed soon after presentation. Additionally, in the appropriate clinical setting, open wounds such as sinus tracts and ulcers, as well as joint fluid aspirates, can be used for microbiological culture to determine the causative microorganism. If MRI findings are positive, surgery is not needed, and alternative sites for microbiological culture are not available, then percutaneous image-guided biopsies can be performed. The expert panel recommends that antibiotics be avoided or discontinued for an optimal period of 2 weeks prior to a biopsy whenever possible. Patients with extensive necrotic decubitus ulcers or other surgical emergencies should not undergo percutaneous image-guided biopsies but rather should be admitted for surgical debridement and intraoperative cultures. Multidisciplinary discussion and approach are crucial to ensure optimal diagnosis and care of patients diagnosed with chronic osteomyelitis.

Investigation and management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: An update for the foot and ankle orthopaedic surgeon

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) poses a significant challenge in the management of diabetic patients, often leading to severe complications and increased morbidity. Effective management of DFO requires a multidisciplinary approach, involving endocrinologists, infectious disease specialists, vascular surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, and wound care experts. Early diagnosis is paramount, facilitated by advanced imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and bone scintigraphy. Once diagnosed, the treatment strategy hinges on a combination of medical and surgical interventions. Antibiotic therapy, guided by culture results, plays a central role in managing DFO. Tailored regimens targeting the specific pathogens involved are administered, often for prolonged durations. Surgical intervention becomes necessary when conservative measures fall short. Surgical approaches range from minimally invasive procedures, like percutaneous drainage, to more extensive interventions like debridement and bone resection. Prevention of DFO recurrence is equally vital, emphasising glycemic control, meticulous foot care, patient education, monitoring of at-risk signs, revascularization and early intervention when indicated. The management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis mandates a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the infectious and surgical aspects of the condition. A collaborative, interdisciplinary approach ensures timely diagnosis, tailored treatment, and holistic care. Further research into novel therapeutic modalities and long-term outcomes remains essential in refining the management of this complex and debilitating complication of diabetes.

Comparative Efficacy of Conservative Surgery vs Minor Amputation for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical intervention for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). Conservative surgery-amputation-free resection of infected bone and soft tissues-is gaining traction as an alternative to minor amputation. Our primary objective was to explore the comparative effectiveness of conservative surgery and minor amputations in clinical failure risk 1 year after index intervention. We also aimed to explore microbiological recurrence at 1 year, and revision surgery risk over a 10-year study period.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-center chart review of DFO patients undergoing either conservative surgery or minor amputation. We used multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier estimates to explore the effect of surgical intervention on clinical failure (recurrent diabetic foot infection at surgical site within 1 year after index operation), microbiological recurrence at 1 year, and revision surgery risk over a 10-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

651 patients were included (conservative surgery, n = 121; minor amputation, n = 530). Clinical failure occurred in 34 (28%) patients in the conservative surgery group, and in 111 (21%) of the minor amputation group at 1 year (P = .09). After controlling for potential confounders, we found no association between conservative surgery and clinical failure at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.1). We found no between-group differences in microbiological recurrence at 1 year (conservative surgery: 8 [6.6%]; minor amputation: 33 [6.2%]; P = .25; adjusted HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.5-2.6). Over the 10-year period, the conservative group underwent significantly more revision surgeries (conservative surgery: 85 [70.2%]; minor amputation: 252 [47.5%]; P < .01; adjusted HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8).

CONCLUSION

We found that with comorbidity-based patient selection, conservative surgery in the treatment of DFO was associated with the same rates of clinical failure and microbiological recurrence at 1 year, but with significantly more revision surgeries during follow-up, compared with minor amputations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative effectiveness study.

IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes-related Foot Infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

How wound environments trigger the release from Rifampicin-loaded liposomes

BACKGROUND

Chronic wounds often contain high levels of proinflammatory cytokines that prolong the wound-healing process. Patients suffering from these conditions are likely to benefit from topical rifampicin therapy. Although recent research indicates considerable anti-inflammatory properties of the antibiotic, currently, there are no commercial topical wound healing products available. To address this medical need, a liposomal drug delivery system was developed. A mechanistic investigation outlined major influences of wound environments that affect the release kinetics and, as a consequence, local bioavailability.

METHODS

Liposomes were prepared using the thin-film hydration method and subsequently freeze-dried at the pilot scale to improve their stability. We investigated the influence of oxidation, plasma proteins, and lipolysis on the in vitro release of rifampicin and its two main degradation products using the Dispersion Releaser technology. A novel simulated wound fluid provided a standardized environment to study critical influences on the release. It reflects the pathophysiological environment regarding pH, buffer capacity, and protein content.

RESULTS

During storage, the liposomes efficiently protect rifampicin from degradation. After the dispersion of the vesicles in simulated wound fluid, despite the significant albumin binding (>70%), proteins have no considerable effect on the release. Also, the presence of lipase at pathophysiologically elevated concentrations did not trigger the liberation of rifampicin. Surprisingly, the oxidative environment of the wound bed represents the strongest accelerating influence and triggers the release.

CONCLUSION

A stable topical delivery system of rifampicin has been developed. Once the formulation comes in contact with simulated wound fluid, drug oxidation accelerates the release. The influence of lipases that are assumed to trigger the liberation from liposomes depends on the drug-to-lipid ratio. Considering that inflamed tissues exhibit elevated levels of oxidative stress, the trigger mechanism identified for rifampicin contributes to targeted drug delivery.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic osteomyelitis based on nanomaterials

Chronic osteomyelitis is a painful and serious disease caused by infected surgical prostheses or infected fractures. Traditional treatment includes surgical debridement followed by prolonged systemic antibiotics. However, excessive antibiotic use has been inducing rapid emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria worldwide. Additionally, it is difficult for antibiotics to penetrate internal sites of infection such as bone, thus limiting their efficacy. New approaches to treat chronic osteomyelitis remain a major challenge for orthopedic surgeons. Luckily, the development of nanotechnology has brought new antimicrobial options with high specificity to infection sites, offering a possible way to address these challenges. Substantial progress has been made in constructing antibacterial nanomaterials for treatment of chronic osteomyelitis. Here, we review some current strategies for treatment of chronic osteomyelitis and their underlying mechanisms.

Do Anti-Biofilm Antibiotics Have a Place in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis?

The choice of antibiotic regimens for use in patients presenting with diabetic foot osteomyelitis and their duration differs according to the situation. Antibiotics play a more important role in the medical option where no infected bone has been resected, while their role is reduced but not negligible in the case of surgical options. Some studies have reported the presence of biofilm structures in bone samples taken from patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis, which raises the question of the place of anti-biofilm antibiotic regimens in this setting. During the last two decades, clinical studies have suggested a potential benefit for anti-biofilm antibiotics, mainly rifampicin against staphylococci and fluoroquinolones against gram-negative bacilli. However, no data from randomized controlled studies have been reported so far. The present work provides a summary of the available data on the question of the place of anti-biofilm antibiotics for the treatment of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, but also the potential limitations of such treatments.

A New Inflammatory Marker of Clinical and Diagnostic Importance in Diabetic Foot Infection: Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index

Diabetes and associated complications still pose an important public health problem. Osteomyelitis as especially seen in patients with diabetes is associated with increased rates of morbidity and mortality. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical and diagnostic significance of inflammatory markers, including the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT) to differentiate osteomyelitis and cellulitis. The present study included 96 patients with osteomyelitis (Group 1) and 151 patients with cellulitis (Group 2). Inflammatory markers were significantly elevated in Group 1 compared to Group 2 patients (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the correlation coefficients (rho) between SII and ESR, CRP, and PCT were 0.466 (p < 0.001), 0.627 (p < 0.001), and 0.501 (p < 0.001), respectively, as a result of Spearman's Rho analysis. Accordingly, a moderately positive relationship was found between the variables. The area under the curve (AUC) values for SII, ESR, CRP, and PCT in diabetic foot infection patients with osteomyelitis were 0.687, 0.722, 0.692, and 0.641, respectively. As a result of the Likelhood Ratio (LR) test, the cut-off values were 2.182 for SII (sensitivity: 39.8% and specificity: 79.8%), 76.5 mm/h for ESR (sensitivity: 59.1% and specificity: 73.1%), 109.5 mg/mL for CRP (sensitivity: 40.9% and specificity: 79.8%), and 0.44 ng/mL for PCT (sensitivity: 26.1% and specificity: 88.2%). In conclusion, given that the patients with osteomyelitis had much higher ESR, CRP, PCT, and SII levels combined with the fact that SII is a low-cost and easy-to-measure index, suggests that the same may serve as an effective and novel marker alternative to other inflammatory markers for predicting diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

Meta-Analysis: Outcomes of Surgical and Medical Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes in the published literature on medical and surgical management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO).

METHODS

A PubMed and Google Scholar search of articles relating to DFO was performed over the dates of January 1931 to January 2020. Articles that involved Charcot arthropathy, case reports, small case series, review articles, commentaries, nonhuman studies, and non-English articles were excluded. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to rate the bias of each study. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects and inverse variance methods. The search yielded 1192 articles. After review and the removal of articles that did not meet inclusion criteria, 28 articles remained. Eighteen articles were related to the medical management of DFO and 13 articles were related to surgical management. Three articles looked at a combination of medical and surgical management and were included in both groups. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran Q, I 2, τ2, and τ.

RESULTS

The average success rate was 68.2% (range, 17.0%-97.3%) for medical treatment and 85.7% (range, 65.0%-98.8%) for surgical and medical treatment. There were significant inconsistencies in accounting for peripheral arterial disease and peripheral neuropathy. There was significant heterogeneity in outcomes between studies. However, there was a high rate of successful treatment and a wide range between patients with medical treatment and combined surgical and medical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional properly designed prospective studies with gold-standard references for diagnosing osteomyelitis are needed to help determine whether medical management of DFO can be successful without surgical intervention.

The association between bacteria and outcome and the influence of sampling method, in people with a diabetic foot infection

Purpose

Different bacteria lead to divers diabetic foot infections (DFIs), and some bacteria probably lead to higher amputation and mortality risks. We assessed mortality and amputation risk in relation to bacterial profiles in people DFI and investigated the role of sampling method.

Methods

We included people (> 18 years) with DFI in this retrospective study (2011–2020) at a Dutch tertiary care hospital. We retrieved cultures according to best sampling method: (1) bone biopsy; (2) ulcer bed biopsy; and (3) swab. We aggregated data into a composite determinant, consisting of unrepeated bacteria of one episode of infection, clustered into 5 profiles: (1) Streptococcus and Staphylococcus aureus; (2) coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Cutibacterium, Corynebacterium and Enterococcus; (3) gram-negative; (4) Anaerobic; and (5) less common gram-positive bacteria. We calculated Hazard Ratio’s (HR’s) using time-dependent-Cox regression for the analyses and investigated effect modification by sampling method.

Results

We included 139 people, with 447 person-years follow-up and 459 episodes of infection. Sampling method modified the association between bacterial profiles and amputation for profile 2. HR’s (95% CI’s) for amputation for bacterial profiles 1–5: 0.7 (0.39–1.1); stratified analysis for profile 2: bone biopsy 0.84 (0.26–2.7), ulcer bed biopsy 0.89 (0.34–2.3), swab 5.9*(2.9–11.8); 1.3 (0.78–2.1); 1.6 (0.91–2.6); 1.6 (0.58–4.5). HR’s (95% CI’s) for mortality for bacterial profiles 1–5: 0.89 (0.49–1.6); 0.73 (0.38–1.4); 2.6*(1.4–4.8); 1.1(0.58–2.2); 0.80(0.19–3.3).

Conclusions

In people with DFI, there was no association between bacterial profiles in ulcer bed and bone biopsies and amputation. Only in swab cultures, low-pathogenic bacteria (profile 2), were associated with a higher amputation risk. Infection with gram-negative bacteria was associated with a higher mortality risk. This study underlined the possible negative outcome of DFI treatment based on swabs cultures.

The effectiveness of systemic antibiotics for osteomyelitis of the foot in adults with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review protocol

Background

Osteomyelitis of the foot is a major complication of diabetes that can be limb and life threatening. Systemic antibiotic pharmacotherapy is often used first line to eradicate infection and allow restoration of devitalised bone.

The aim is to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of systemic antibiotics on osteomyelitis of the foot in adults with diabetes mellitus.

Methods

A systematic review of all interventional studies treating osteomyelitis with systemic antibiotics in participants with diabetes mellitus and an ulcer of the foot below the malleoli will be conducted. Studies not available in English and in people below the age of 18 will be excluded. Study selection will follow the Patient Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-P guidelines). The quality of the studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) for all randomised controlled trials and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used for non-randomised controlled trials. Electronic databases will be searched with no timeline restrictions.

Data Extraction

All identified references will be imported to the Rayyan Application. Studies for eligibility will be screened by two reviewers. One reviewer will perform the data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by two authors. If sufficient data is available, the quality will be analysed and a meta-analysis will be performed. Data synthesis will be conducted, and meta-analysis undertaken using RevMan 5.4.1 Meta-analysis software. Non-parametric data may be compared between selective intervention and outcomes.

Discussion

The results of this systematic review will identify the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic therapy on osteomyelitis of the foot in people with diabetes based on the set outcome measure criteria. The findings will establish if there are existing consistent standards or variation in practice when treating diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). The study may establish if guidelines are required to standardise practice when treating DFO with systemic antibiotic therapy. This systematic review protocol will synthesise the existing evidence on the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic therapy for treating DFO.

Trial registration

International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) number CRD42021245424.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13047-022-00554-3.

Bioactive Glass in a Multi Drug Resistance Osteomyelitis in Diabetic Foot: Case Report

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a clinical problem with high risk of amputation. The treatment of DFO is still an unsolved challenge. Surgical therapy, antibiotic therapy or conservative treatment are still debated for the timing and the consequences. Long antibiotic therapies expose the selection of multidrug-resistant bacteria. Nowadays the use of new bone substitutes aims to support the load of the bone segments and to ensure the eradication of the infectious process after surgical treatment. A case report of digital osteomyelitis due to a multidrug resistant bacteria was treated with a conservative treatment and use of bioglass (Bonalive) that has the ability to inhibit bacterial growth. A long follow-up shows the resolution of infectious process, no ulcer recurrence and persistent recovery of its ability to walk. Our results agree with literature data and suggest that bioglass may be considered a useful option to manage DFO and achieve healing with a very conservative approach.

The Fate of Antibiotic Impregnated Cement Space in Treatment for Forefoot Osteomyelitis

Forefoot osteomyelitis can be an extremely challenging problem in orthopedic surgery. Unlike conventional methods, such as amputations, antibiotic impregnated cement space (ACS) was recently introduced and perceived as a substitute for amputation. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical features between diabetic and non-diabetic groups and to evaluate the efficacy of ACS in the treatment of forefoot osteomyelitis, by identifying the clinical characteristics of ACS. We inserted ACS into the forefoot osteomyelitis patients and regularly checked up on them, then analyzed the clinical features of the patients and failure reasons, if ACS had to be removed. Average survival rate of ACS was 60% (21 out of 35 cases) and main failure reason was recurrence of infection. There was no significant clinical difference between diabetic and non-diabetic groups. We concluded that ACS could be a possible way of avoiding amputation if infection is under control. ACS seems to be an innovative method with promising results for foot osteomyelitis, but widely accepted indications need to be agreed upon.

Reliability and Safety of Bedside Blind Bone Biopsy Performed by a Diabetologist for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

OBJECTIVE

Bone biopsy (BB) performed by a surgeon or an interventional radiologist is recommended for suspicion of osteomyelitis underlying diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). To facilitate its practice, we developed a procedure allowing bedside blind bone biopsy (B4) by a diabetologist.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a three-step observational study consisting of a feasibility and safety phase (phase 1) to assess the success and side effects of B4, a validity phase (phase 2) to compare DFU outcomes between positive (B4+) and negative (B4-) bone cultures, and a performance phase (phase 3) to compare B4 with the conventional surgical or radiological procedure basic bone biopsy (B3). Primary end points were the presence of bone tissue (phase 1) and complete DFU healing with exclusive medical treatment at 12 months (phases 2 and 3).

RESULTS

In phase 1, 37 consecutive patients with clinical and/or radiological suspicion of DFU osteomyelitis underwent B4. Bone tissue was collected in all patients with few side effects. In phase 2, a B4+ bone culture was found in 40 of 79 (50.6%) participants. Among B4+ patients, complete wound healing after treatment was 57.5%. No statistical difference was observed with patients with B4- bone culture not treated with antibiotics (71.8%, P = 0.18). In phase 3, the proportion of patients with positive BB was lower in B4 (40 of 79, 50.6%) than in B3 (34 of 44, 77.3%, P < 0.01). However, complete healing was similar (64.6% vs. 54.6%, P = 0.28). No difference in rate of culture contamination was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

B4 is a simple, safe, and efficient procedure for the diagnosis of DFU osteomyelitis with a similar proportion of healing to conventional BB.

Best Practices: CT-Guided Percutaneous Sampling of Vertebral Discitis-Osteomyelitis and Technical Factors Maximizing Biopsy Yield

Vertebral discitis-osteomyelitis is an infection of the intervertebral disk and vertebral bodies that may extend to adjacent paraspinal and epidural soft tissues. Its incidence is increasing, likely because of improved treatments and increased life expectancy for patients with predisposing chronic disease and increased rates of IV drug use and intravascular intervention. Because blood cultures are frequently negative in patients with vertebral discitis-osteomyelitis, biopsy is often indicated to identify a causative microorganism for targeted antimicrobial therapy. The reported yield of CT-guided percutaneous sampling is 31-91%, which is lower than the reported yield of open biopsy of 76-91%. However, the less invasive approach may be favored given its relative safety and low cost. If paravertebral fluid collections are present, CT-guided aspiration should be performed. If aspiration is unsuccessful or no paravertebral fluid collections are present, CT-guided percutaneous biopsy should be performed, considering technical factors (e.g., anatomic approach, needle selection, and needle angulation) that may improve microbiologic yield. Although antimicrobial therapy should be withheld for 1-2 weeks before biopsy if clinically feasible, biopsy may still be performed without stopping antimicrobial therapy if needed. Because of the importance of targeted antimicrobial therapy, repeat biopsy should be considered after 72 hours if initial biopsy does not identify a pathogen.

Are Surrogate Markers for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Remission Reliable?

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate surrogate markers commonly used in the literature for diabetic foot osteomyelitis remission after initial treatment for diabetic foot infections (DFIs).

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with DFIs were prospectively enrolled and followed for 12 months. Osteomyelitis was determined from bone culture and histologic analysis initially and for recurrence. Fisher exact and χ2 tests were used for dichotomous variables and Student t and Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables (α = .05).

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were diagnosed as having osteomyelitis and 11 as having soft-tissue infections. Four patients (16.7%) with osteomyelitis had reinfection based on bone biopsy. The success of osteomyelitis treatment varied based on the surrogate marker used to define remission: osteomyelitis infection (16.7%), failed wound healing (8.3%), reulceration (20.8%), readmission (16.7%), amputation (12.5%). There was no difference in outcomes among patients who were initially diagnosed as having osteomyelitis versus soft-tissue infections. There were no differences in osteomyelitis reinfection (16.7% versus 45.5%; P = .07), wounds that failed to heal (8.3% versus 9.1%; P = .94), reulceration (20.8% versus 27.3%; P = .67), readmission for DFIs at the same site (16.7% versus 36.4%; P = .20), amputation at the same site after discharge (12.5% versus 36.4%; P = .10). Osteomyelitis at the index site based on bone biopsy indicated that failed therapy was 16.7%. Indirect markers demonstrated a failure rate of 8.3% to 20.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Most osteomyelitis markers were similar to markers in soft-tissue infection. Commonly reported surrogate markers were not shown to be specific to identify patients who failed osteomyelitis treatment compared with patients with soft-tissue infections. Given this, these surrogate markers are not reliable for use in practice to identify osteomyelitis treatment failure.

Using a BonE BiOPsy (BeBoP) to determine the causative agent in persons with diabetes and foot osteomyelitis: study protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) poses a major disease burden. It can generally be treated with long-term antibacterial therapy. International guidelines recommend to base antibacterial therapy choices on percutaneous bone biopsy culture, while in practice, therapy is frequently based on (less invasive) ulcer bed cultures. It is currently unknown if treatment outcomes of DFO differ depending on the chosen diagnostic strategy.

METHODS

The BeBoP trial is a multicentre; randomised controlled; physician-, researcher- and subject-blinded; clinical trial comparing two diagnostic strategies in persons with DFO. Culture-directed antibacterial therapy will be based on either percutaneous bone biopsy culture results (intervention group) or ulcer bed biopsy culture results (comparison group). We will enrol 80 subjects with diabetes mellitus (≥ 18 years) and DFO, and we will use block randomisation stratified per centre to randomise them in a 1:1 allocation. The primary outcome is remission of DFO 12 months after enrolment. The secondary outcomes are the time to remission, signs of inflammation or ulceration at the primary location of infection at 6 and 12 months, microbiological and molecular profiles of culture outcomes, surgical interventions including amputation, total antibacterial therapy duration, infection-free survival days, adverse events, quality of life and survival. We will compare the outcomes by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis.

DISCUSSION

We aim to compare clinical remission in persons with DFO treated with antibacterial therapy based on either percutaneous bone biopsy culture results or ulcer bed biopsy culture results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register NL 7582 . Registered on 05 March 2019.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis

Introduction: The diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually clinical. Its severity is related to the location and depth of the lesion, and the presence of necrosis or gangrene. The aetiology of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually polymicrobial, and DFO is often associated with chronic or recurring ulceration.Areas covered: We built on the  International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines on the management of diabetic foot infection, providing an outline of the current and new concepts in pharmacotherapy in DFO. We assess future strategies in both medical, surgical and combination management of DFO.Expert opinion: Surgical removal of infected bone is considered as the standard treatment, but a medical approach of certain selected situations has now proven efficacy in selected patients. The combination of new modalities in local antibiotic delivery may provide better long-term solutions and more lasting remission and avoid the disadvantages of prolonged systemic antibiotics.

Long-Term Complications after Surgical or Medical Treatment of Predominantly Forefoot Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: 1 Year Follow Up

AIM

To compare long-term complications according to the treatment received for management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (surgical or medical) at 1 year follow up.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A prospective observational study was conducted involving 116 patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. The patients received surgical or medical treatment based on the principles described in the literature. To register the development of a complication, both groups of treatments were followed-up 1 year after the ulcer had healed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six (82.8%) patients received surgical treatment and 20 (17.2%) medical treatment. No differences were found in the time to healing between both groups of treatment, 15.7 ± 9.2 weeks in the surgical group versus 16.4 ± 12.1 weeks in the medical group; p = 0.103. During follow up, 85 (73.3%) patients developed complications without differences between both groups, 68 (70.8%) in the surgical group versus 17 (85%) in the medical group (p = 0.193). The most common complication in both groups was re-ulceration. We did not observe significant differences comparing complication-free time survival between both treatments (p = 0.665).

CONCLUSION

The onset of complications after healing in patients who suffered from diabetic foot osteomyelitis was not associated with the treatment received. Surgical and medical approaches to the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis produced similar results in long-term follow up.

Medical Versus Surgical Treatment for the Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: A Systematic Review

A systematic review and quality assessment was performed to assess the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis by medical or surgical treatment. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used. All selected studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool to assess the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The literature was revised using PubMed (Medline) and Embase (Elsevier) up to September 2020 to identify clinical trials assessing medical or surgical treatment to manage diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A total of six clinical trials that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 308 participants. Healing rate, complete closure of the wound, and type of complications were the outcomes evaluated. Risk of bias assessment showed that only two of the six clinical trials included in the systematic review had a low risk of bias. Based on our findings, we believe that the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis remains challenging. There are few high-quality clinical trials that both stratify clinical presentations and compare these treatments. We conclude that the available evidence is insufficient to identify the best option to cure diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark practice and improve the delivery of care in persons with diabetic foot infections

Aims

To utilise the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) - diabetic foot infection (DFI) guidelines as an audit tool for clinical practice in patients with diabetes attending a High-Risk Foot Service.

Methods

Data from 93 consecutive patients were collected over a 19-month period in patients attending a High-Risk Foot Service. The diagnosis and management of each patient in the sample were compared against the 2019 IWGDF DFI guidelines, grouped into four categories: Diagnosis, Microbiology, Treatment of soft tissue infection, and Surgical treatment and osteomyelitis. Deficits in performance were recorded using the recommendations as a benchmark standard.

Results

There were 109 DFI events. Nineteen (63%) of the recommendations were met, 7 (24%) were partially met, and four (13%) recommendations were not met. Fourteen of the sample had no documented requests for full blood counts. Tissue was obtained for culture in 32 (29%) of the sample. No percutaneous bone biopsies were performed. Only 13 (28%) patients had intraoperative bone specimens sent for culture and sensitivities, with no bone specimens sent for histopathology. Modification of antibiotic therapy following available culture results was low, occurring in 12 out of 63 possible occasions (19%). The duration of antibiotic regimens in PEDIS 2 infections and osteomyelitis was greater than that recommended.

Conclusions

Utilising the IWGDF DFI guidelines to benchmark clinical practice is a useful tool to identify gaps in clinical performance or service delivery and may help to improve patient care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13047-021-00448-w.

Multidisciplinary Approach for the Management and Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections with a Resorbable, Gentamicin-Loaded Bone Graft Substitute

Diabetic patients are at increased risk of developing foot ulcers which may cause bone infections associated with a high probability of both amputation and mortality. Therefore, prompt diagnosis and adequate treatment are of key importance. In our Diabetic Foot Unit, effective multidisciplinary treatment of osteomyelitis secondary to diabetes involves the application of a gentamicin-eluting calcium sulphate/hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute to fill residual bone voids after debridement. The data of all patients treated with the gentamicin-eluting calcium sulphate/hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute for diabetic foot infections with ulcer formation and osteomyelitis at metatarsals, calcaneus and hindfoot at our institute from July 2013 to September 2016 were retrospectively collected and evaluated. A total of 35 patients were included in this retrospective single-arm case series and were either continuously followed up for at least one year or until healing was confirmed. Nineteen lesions affected the distal row of tarsus/talus, ten the calcaneus and a further six were located at the metatarsals. While all of the metatarsal lesions had healed at 1-year follow-up, the healing rate in the hindfoot region was lower with 62.5% at the calcaneus and 72.2% at the distal tarsus and talus at 12 months, respectively. The overall cure rate for ulcerous bone infection was 81.3%. In two calcaneal lesions (25%) and two lesions of distal tarsus/talus (11.1%) amputation was considered clinically necessary. Promising results were achieved in the treatment of diabetic foot infections with soft tissue ulcers by a multidisciplinary approach involving extensive debridement followed by adequate dead space management with a resorbable gentamicin-eluting bone graft substitute.

Concordance of bone and non-bone specimens in microbiological diagnosis of osteomyelitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of osteomyelitis is invasive and expensive as the current standard technique is the bone biopsy. Our aim was to compare the degree of agreement and concordance between standard bone biopsy and other non-bone techniques.

METHODS

We performed an electronic search through 12 electronic databases to retrieve relevant studeis. Our criteria included any original article that reported the degree of agreement and/or the concordance between bone biopsy and other non-bone techniques in diagnosing osteomyelitis. We published our protocol in PROSPERO with a registration number, CRD42017080336.

RESULTS

There were 29 studies included in the qualitative analysis, of which 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Samples from sinus tract had the highest concordance with bone biopsy samples, while swab samples were the least concordant with bone biopsy samples. Additionally, Staphylococcus aureus was the most common bacteria isolated and the most concordant from samples, compared to other types of causative agents. Sinus tract had a significantly very high degree of agreement with bone samples. S. aureus had the highest degree of agreement in bone smaples.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis of osteomyelitis using sinus tract swab is close in results' accuracy to bone biopsy. S. aureus was the most common extracted organism found in these samples and had the highest degree of agreement.

Percutaneous Bone Biopsy for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Diabetes is the leading cause of lower extremity nontraumatic amputation globally, and diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually the terminal event before limb loss. Although guidelines recommend percutaneous bone biopsy (PBB) for microbiological diagnosis of DFO in several common scenarios, it is unclear how frequently PBBs yield positive cultures and whether they cause harm or improve outcomes.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Trials databases for articles in any language published up to December 31, 2019, reporting the frequency of culture-positive PBBs. We calculated the pooled proportion of culture-positive PBBs using a random-effects meta-analysis model and reported on PBB-related adverse events, DFO outcomes, and antibiotic adjustment based on PBB culture results where available.

Results

Among 861 articles, 11 studies met inclusion criteria and included 780 patients with 837 PBBs. Mean age ranged between 56.6 and 71.0 years old. The proportion of males ranged from 62% to 86%. All studies were longitudinal observational cohorts, and 10 were from Europe. The range of culture-positive PBBs was 56%-99%, and the pooled proportion of PBBs with a positive culture was 84% (95% confidence interval, 73%-91%). There was heterogeneity between studies and no consistency in definitions used to define adverse events. Impact of PBB on DFO outcomes or antibiotic management were seldom reported.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggests PBBs have a high yield of culture-positive results. However, this is an understudied topic, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and the current literature provides very limited data regarding procedure safety and impact on clinical outcomes or antibiotic management.

Role of inflammatory markers in the healing time of diabetic foot osteomyelitis treated by surgery or antibiotics

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the predictive role of inflammatory markers in the healing time of diabetic foot osteomyelitis treated by surgery or antibiotics.

METHODS

An observational study of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) and clinically suspected osteomyelitis. The patients underwent surgical or antibiotic treatment for bone infection in a specialised diabetic foot unit. Blood samples were taken from each patient to analyse biomarkers. The main outcome was the number of weeks until healing occurred.

RESULTS

A total of 116 patients took part in the study. The number of weeks until healing was similar for both groups (surgical n=96 and antiobiotic n=20, treatments). No association was observed among biomarkers as predictors of time-to-healing.

CONCLUSION

There is not enough evidence to define the prognostic role of inflammatory markers in the healing time of DFUs complicated with diabetic foot osteomyelitis, regardless of the treatment administered.

The infected diabetic foot: Can serum biomarkers predict osteomyelitis after hospital discharge for diabetic foot infections?

The aim of this study is to evaluate serum biomarkers to monitor high-risk patients for reinfection of bone. Thirty-five patients were prospectively enrolled with moderate to severe diabetic foot infections with suspicion of osteomyelitis. Bone samples were obtained for culture and histology. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients were compared using χ² square test. Biomarkers (white blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, c-reactive protein, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1) were assessed at baseline, 3, and 6 weeks after treatment initiation and evaluated for correlation with reinfection of bone. After 6 weeks of antibiotic treatment, ESR at 73.5 mm/h (sensitivity 62.5%, specificity 100%, area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) 0.7839, 95% CI 0.54-1.00, P < .01) and IL-8 at 15.09 mg/dL (sensitivity 42.9%, specificity 92.0% AUROC 0.6286, 95% CI 0.36-0.90, P = .0496) were associated with reinfection of bone. An increase in IL-8 from week 0 to 6 >0.95 mg/dL was associated with reinfection (sensitivity 71%, specificity 72% AUROC 0.7057, 95% CI 0.49-0.92, P = .04). An ESR change from week 0-6 of -16.5% (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 86.4% AUROC 0.7403, 95% CI 0.48-1.00, P = .02), CRP (-)74.4% (sensitivity 66.7%, specificity 91.3% AUROC 0.7174, 95% CI 0.40-1.00, P = .04), IL-6 (-)49.9% (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 76% AUROC 0.7371, 95% CI 0.47-1.00, P = .04), and IL-8 29% (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 56.0% AUROC of 0.7343, 95% CI 0.54-0.93, P = .048) were associated with increased risk of reinfection. Pilot data suggest that serum biomarkers (ESR, IL8 and IL6, MCP-1) may be correlated with developing osteomyelitis and could be used to monitor high-risk patients for reinfection.

Surgical techniques for Bone Biopsy in Diabetic Foot Infection, and association between results and treatment duration

Surgery is an important part of the management of patients diagnosed with DFO. It consists in some selected patients, to remove all or part of the infected bone(s) or even to amputate all or part of the foot. Despite the use of sophisticated imaging techniques, it is however difficult to remove all the infected tissue while respecting the principles of an economical surgery. Bone biopsy performed at the margins of the resection permits to identify residual osteomyelitis and to adjust the post-surgical antibiotic treatment. Some recent studies have reported the way to perform bone margin biopsies and have assessed the impact of the bone results on the patient's outcome. However, the real impact of a residual osteomyelitis on the risk of recurrent DFO is still debated and questions regarding the interpretation of the results remain to be solved. Similarly, the consequences in terms of choice and duration of the antimicrobial treatment to use in case of positive bone margin are not clearly established.

Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Combined With the Probe-to-Bone Test for Fast and Early Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

This study aimed to investigate the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) optimal cutoff point in Chinese patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) and to evaluate the screening value of ESR combined with probe-to-bone (PTB) test for a fast diagnosis of DFO in early stage. A total of 204 diabetic inpatients with foot infection were tested for white blood cell count, neutrophil %, C reactive protein, and ESR at admission within 24 hours. All patients were performed PTB test. Patients with DFO (111) were confirmed by bone biopsy, the other patients (86) had only soft tissue infection. Although white blood cell count, neutrophil %, C-reactive protein, and ESR were different between the 2 groups, only area under curve of ESR was 0.832, with the value as a diagnostic indicator. The best cut point of ESR was >43 mm/h; the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (+PV), and negative predictive value (−PV) were 82.9%, 70.5%, 0.78, and 0.77, respectively. ESR combined with PTB test (serial test), the sensitivity, specificity, +PV, −PV, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), and negative LR (−LR) were 63.56%, 98%, 0.97, 0.67, 31.75, and 0.37, respectively. ESR combined with PTB test (parallel test), the sensitivity, specificity, +PV, −PV, +LR, and −LR were 96%, 65.7%, 0.78, 093, 2.8, and 0.06, respectively, combined with PTB test is simple, favorable for application, and can early fast screening patients with DFO in high-risk patients.

Adjunctive rifampin therapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of diabetes continues to rise around the world. Diabetic foot is a serious complication of diabetes, and diabetic patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) have a fourfold increased risk of amputation, usually indicating death. Therefore, it is particularly important to seek a more effective treatment for DFO. The treatment of DFO varies from person to person, and antimicrobial therapies vary widely. A large number of clinical studies have shown that rifampicin adjuvant therapy can reduce the rate of amputation and mortality in DFO patients. However, there is no systematic summary of clinical evidence, which limits the clinical application of rifampicin. Therefore, we attempted to provide high-quality evidence for the clinical efficacy and safety of rifampin in the adjuvant treatment of DFO through this meta-analysis.

METHODS

English literature is mainly searched in Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science, while Chinese literature is from CNKI, CBM, VIP and Wangfang databases. At the same time, we will search clinical registration tests and gray literature. Two methodologically trained researchers will read the title, abstract, and full text, and independently select qualified literature based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Binary data is expressed as relative risk, continuous data is expressed as mean difference or standard mean difference. The final data are synthesized using a fixed effect model or a random effect model, depending on the presence of heterogeneity. In the end, the patient's amputation rate and mortality were the main research indicators. Survival rate, HbA1c, serum creatinine, changes in ulcer area, and SF-36 quality of life assessment were used as secondary indicators. We will perform a sensitivity analysis to assess the stability of the results. Then the publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot analysis and Egger test. Finally, we will use a "recommendation grading, evaluation, formulation and evaluation" system to assess the quality of the evidence. All data analysis will be meta-analyzed by the statistical software RevMan software version 5.3.

RESULTS

This study will provide a high-quality comprehensive report on the effectiveness and safety of rifampicin in the treatment of DFO, and our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis will provide a comprehensive summary and careful evaluation of rifampicin as an adjuvant treatment of DFO with a view to providing multiple options for clinical treatment of the disease. REGISTRATION NUMBER:: is INPLASY202040084.

Admission Time Deep Swab Specimens Compared With Surgical Bone Sampling in Hospitalized Individuals With Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis and Soft Tissue Infection

Whether deep swab cultures taken at admission reliably identify pathogens compared to surgical bone specimens in hospitalized individuals with diabetic foot osteomyelitis and soft tissue infection is unclear. Comparison of microbiological isolates between a deep wound swab (DWS) taken at the time of admission through the actively infected, discharging ulcer probing to the bone and the subsequent surgical bone sample (SBS) taken during surgical debridement was made. A total of 63 subjects (age 60.8 ± 13.5 years, 75% male, 80% Type 2 diabetes, HbA1C 8.9%±2.2%) were included. The proportion of Gram-positive (DWS 49% v SBS 52%) and Gram-negative (DWS 60% v SBS 60%) isolates was similar between the techniques. However, the overall concordance of isolates between the two techniques was only fair (κ=0.302). The best concordance was observed for Staphylococcus aureus (κ=0.571) and MRSA (κ=0.644). There was a correlation between number of isolates in SBS with prior antibiotic therapy of any duration (r= -0.358, p=0.005) and with the duration of ulceration (r=0.296, p=0.045); no clinical correlations were found for DWS. Prior antibiotic therapy (p=0.03) and duration of ulceration <8 weeks (p=0.025) were predictive of negative growth on SBS. In conclusion, we found only a fair concordance between deep wound swabs acquired at admission and surgical bone specimens in those presenting with a severe diabetic foot infection and features of osteomyelitis. Ensuring early surgical debridement of all infected tissue and obtaining bone specimens should be considered a clinical priority, which may also reduce the likelihood of negative growth on SBS.

Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections as of June 2018. This systematic review is an update of previous reviews, the first of which was undertaken in 2010 and the most recent in 2014, by the infection committee of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot. We defined the context of literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (PICOs) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and the methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 15 327 articles, of which we selected 48 for full-text review; we added five more studies discovered by means other than the systematic literature search. Among these selected articles were 11 high-quality studies published in the last 4 years and two Cochrane systematic reviews. Overall, the outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot were broadly equivalent across studies, except that treatment with tigecycline was inferior to ertapenem (±vancomycin). Similar outcomes were also reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various adjunctive therapies, such as negative pressure wound therapy, topical ointments or hyperbaric oxygen, on infection related outcomes of the diabetic foot. In general, the quality of more recent trial designs are better in past years, but there is still a great need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This guideline is on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes and updates the 2015 IWGDF infection guideline. On the basis of patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes (PICOs) developed by the infection committee, in conjunction with internal and external reviewers and consultants, and on systematic reviews the committee conducted on the diagnosis of infection (new) and treatment of infection (updated from 2015), we offer 27 recommendations. These cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infection, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Of note, we have updated this scheme for the first time since we developed it 15 years ago. We also review the microbiology of diabetic foot infections, including how to collect samples and to process them to identify causative pathogens. Finally, we discuss the approach to treating diabetic foot infections, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and for bone infections, when and how to approach surgical treatment, and which adjunctive treatments we think are or are not useful for the infectious aspects of diabetic foot problems. For this version of the guideline, we also updated four tables and one figure from the 2016 guideline. We think that following the principles of diagnosing and treating diabetic foot infections outlined in this guideline can help clinicians to provide better care for these patients.

An evidence based narrative review on treatment of diabetic foot osteomyelitis

OBJECTIVE

The diagnosis of diabetic food infection is usually clinical, and its severity is related to location and depth of the lesion, and the presence of necrosis or gangrene. Osteomyelitis of the foot and ankle can be extremely debilitating, and, in the preantibiotic era acute staphylococcal osteomyelitis carried a mortality rate of 50%. The microbiology of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually polymicrobial. Indeed, gram-negative and gram-positive bacilli can be identified using molecular techniques applied to bone biopsies compared to conventional techniques. The aim of the present study is to report a complete overview regarding medical and surgical management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) in combination or alone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a search in PubMed and Scopus electronic databases (up to January 2019) of articles assessing the epidemiology, diagnostic strategy and pharmacological treatment of diabetic foot infection. In the search strategy, we used various combinations of the following key terms: infection, orthopaedic, diabetic foot, management, DFO.

RESULTS

This article discusses the definition, epidemiology, microbiological assessment, clinical evaluation, pharmacological and surgical management and a comparison between them, of DFO. After the initial literature search and removal of duplicate records, a total of 756 potentially relevant citations were identified. After a further screening and according to the inclusion criteria, a total of 65 articles were included in the present review.

CONCLUSION

The association of antibiotic and surgical therapy seems to be more effective compared to each one alone. The lack of comparison studies and randomized controlled trials makes it difficult to give information about the efficacy of the different management therapies.

Physician experts in diabetes are natural team leaders for managing diabetic patients with foot complications. A position statement from the Italian diabetic foot study group

Diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) is a complex disease. The best outcomes are reported with the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) approach, where each member works collaboratively according to his/her expertise. However, which health provider should act as the team leader (TL) has not been determined. The TL should be familiar with the management of diabetes, related complications and comorbidities. He/she should be able to diagnose and manage foot infections, including prompt surgical treatment of local lesions, such as abscesses or phlegmons, in an emergent way in the first meeting with the patient. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports, Italy is one of countries with a low amputation rate in diabetic patients. Many factors might have contributed to this result, including 1)the special attention directed to diabetes by the public health system, which has defined diabetes as a "protected disease", and accordingly, offers diabetic patients, at no charge, the best specialist care, including specific devices, and 2)the presence of a network of diabetic foot (DF) clinics managed by diabetologists with medical and surgical expertise. The health care providers all share a "patient centred model" of care, for which they use their internal medicine background and skills in podiatric surgery to manage acute or chronic needs in a timely manner. Therefore, according to Italian experiences, which are fully reported in this document, we believe that only a skilled diabetologist/endocrinologist should act as a TL. Courses and university master's degree programmes focused on DF should guarantee specific training for physicians to become a TL.

Feasibility of Percutaneous Bone Biopsy as Part of the Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis in a 100% Neuropathic, Grade 3 IDSA/IWGDF Population on an Outpatient Basis

The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of percutaneous bone biopsy in an ambulatory setting as part of the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) on an outpatient basis. DFO may complicate some cases of apparently nonsevere foot infections in patients with diabetes and greatly increase the risk of a lower extremity amputation. It has been suggested that bone culture-based antibiotic therapy is a predictive factor of success in patients with diabetes treated nonsurgically for osteomyelitis of the foot. It is recommended to identify the causative microorganism(s) by the means of either a surgical or percutaneous bone biopsy taken appropriately to select the proper antibiotic therapy. Percutaneous bone biopsy in patients not requiring surgery is, however, not performed in everyday practice as it should be according to the current recommendations. In the present retrospective study, we report a series of 23 consecutive patients with a suspicion of DFO in whom 28 bone samples were collected by percutaneous biopsy at the bedside in an outpatient setting. The percentage of positive cultures was in accordance with that reported in the literature. The mean number of isolates per specimen was 1.04. After a mean 12-month follow-up, the remission was almost of 78%. No adverse event related to the bone biopsy was noted. After a 1-year follow-up, no recurrence was recorded among the patients in remission. The results of the present study suggest that bedside percutaneous bone biopsy performed in the ambulatory setting is a valuable and safe tool in the management of DFO on an outpatient basis.

A multicenter randomized placebo controlled trial of rifampin to reduce pedal amputations for osteomyelitis in veterans with diabetes (VA INTREPID)

Background

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus continues to inexorably rise in the United States and throughout the world. Lower limb amputations are a devastating comorbid complication of diabetes mellitus. Osteomyelitis increases the risk of amputation fourfold and commonly presages death.

Antimicrobial therapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) varies greatly, indicating that high quality data are needed to inform clinical decision making. Several small trials have indicated that the addition of rifampin to backbone antimicrobial regimens for osteomyelitis outside the setting of the diabetic foot results in 28 to 42% higher cure rates.

Methods/design

This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind investigation of the addition of 6 weeks of rifampin, 600 mg daily, vs. matched placebo (riboflavin) to standard-of-care, backbone antimicrobial therapy for DFO. The study population are patients enrolled in Veteran Health Administration (VHA), ages ≥18 and ≤ 89 years with diabetes mellitus and definite or probable osteomyelitis of the foot for whom an extended course of oral or intravenous antibiotics is planned. The primary endpoint is amputation-free survival. The primary hypothesis is that using rifampin as adjunctive therapy will lower the hazard rate compared with the group that does not use rifampin as adjunctive therapy. The primary hypothesis will be tested by means of a two-sided log-rank test with a 5% significance level. The test has 90% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.67 or lower with a total of 880 study participants followed on average for 1.8 years.

Discussion

VA INTREPID will test if a rifampin-adjunctive antibiotic regimen increases amputation-free survival in patients seeking care in the VHA with DFO. A positive finding and its adoption by clinicians would reduce lower extremity amputations and their associated physical and emotional impact and reduce mortality for Veterans and for the general population with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. Given that rifampin-adjunctive regimens are currently employed for therapy for the majority of DFO cases in Europe, and only in a small minority of cases in the United States, the trial results will impact therapeutic decisions, even if the null hypothesis is not rejected.

Trial registration

Registered January 6, 2017 at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03012529.

Molecular Imaging of Diabetic Foot Infections: New Tools for Old Questions

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common, complex, and costly medical problem with increasing prevalence. Diagnosing DFIs is a clinical challenge due to the poor specificity of the available methods to accurately determine the presence of infection in these patients. However, failure to perform an opportune diagnosis and provide optimal antibiotic therapy can lead to higher morbidity for the patient, unnecessary amputations, and increased healthcare costs. Novel developments in bacteria-specific molecular imaging can provide a non-invasive assessment of the infection site to support diagnosis, determine the extension and location of the infection, guide the selection of antibiotics, and monitor the response to treatment. This is a review of recent research in molecular imaging of infections in the context of DFI. We summarize different clinical and preclinical methods and the translational implications aimed to improve the care of patients with DFI.

Assessment of the Risk Factors of Multidrug-Resistant Organism Infection in Adults With Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes and Diabetic Foot Ulcer

OBJECTIVES

To our knowledge, this is the first review to analyze the literature identifying risk factors for multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) infection in patients with diabetic foot ulcer. The purpose of this study was to collect the currently published data to determine the most commonly and consistently identified risk factors for MDRO infection.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, BIOSIS, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched. The last search updated was in September 2019. The evaluated outcomes included age, male sex, type of diabetes, diabetes duration, level of glycated hemoglobin, ulcer type, wound duration, ulcer size, ulcer grade, osteomyelitis, previous antibiotic therapy and previous hospitalization. The standard mean difference or the odds ratio (OR) was calculated for continuous or dichotomous data, respectively. The quality of the studies was assessed, and meta-analyses were performed with Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies, including 1,229 patients provided evidence for 6 possible risk factors for MDRO infection. Ischemic ulcer (OR, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.71), ulcer size (standard mean difference, -0.27; 95% CI, -0.46 to -0.08), ulcer grade (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.83), osteomyelitis (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.45), previous antibiotic therapy (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.14) and previous hospitalization (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.28) were identified as risk factors for MDRO infection in patients with diabetic foot ulcer.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis indicated that ischemic ulcer, ulcer size, ulcer grade, osteomyelitis, previous antibiotic therapy and previous hospitalization were associated with MDRO infection in patients with diabetic foot ulcer.

Adjunctive Rifampin Therapy For Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis in the Veterans Health Administration

IMPORTANCE

Among patients diagnosed with diabetes, the lifetime incidence of foot ulcers is 15%. Infection is a common complication of foot ulcers, and 20% to 60% of infections result in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). Current treatment guidelines do not endorse any specific antibiotic agent for DFO, but small clinical trials suggest the addition of rifampin to antimicrobial regimens results in improved cure rates for osteomyelitis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated for DFO in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with and without adjunctive rifampin.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This observational cohort study used VHA databases to identify index DFO cases from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2013, and analyzed patients alive and without high-level amputation at 90 days after diagnosis in whom antibiotic therapy was initiated within 6 weeks of diagnosis. Patients with death or major amputation within 90 days of diagnosis, who were not treated with systemic antibiotics dispensed by the VHA within 6 weeks of diagnosis, or who were treated at facilities where rifampin was not dispensed for DFO were excluded. The retrospective cohort to inform the planning of a multisite randomized clinical trial was first investigated in spring 2015; retrospective analysis was performed from February 2017 through September 2019.

EXPOSURES

Patients initiating rifampin therapy within 6 weeks of the DFO diagnosis and receiving the drug for at least 14 days within 90 days of diagnosis were considered treated with rifampin. Patients not administered rifampin within 90 days of diagnosis served as the comparator group.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A combined end point of mortality or amputation within 2 years of diagnosis was analyzed. Differences in times to event were evaluated using log-rank tests. Differences in event rates were compared using χ2 tests and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The analysis population included 130 patients treated with rifampin and 6044 treated without rifampin (total of 6174; 6085 men [98.6%]; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [9.7] years). Lower event rates were observed among the rifampin group (35 of 130 [26.9%] vs 2250 of 6044 [37.2%]; P = .02). Patients treated with rifampin were younger (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [9.4] vs 64.9 [9.6] years), had fewer comorbidities (mean [SD] Charlson comorbidity index score, 3.5 [1.8] vs 4.0 [2.2]), had more infectious disease specialty consultations (63 of 130 [48.5%] vs 1960 of 6044 [32.4%]), and more often had Staphylococcus aureus identified in cultures (55 of 130 [42.3%] vs 1755 of 6044 [29.0%]) than patients not treated with rifampin. A logistic regression estimating the odds of events and controlling for these and other covariates yielded a significant association of rifampin (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43-0.96; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, patients administered rifampin experienced lower rates of death and amputation than patients not treated with rifampin, which remained significant after adjustment for confounders. These results coupled with existing evidence from small clinical trials suggest the addition of rifampin to current treatment regimens may be a useful antimicrobial option in the treatment of DFO.

Outcomes of Limb-Sparing Surgery for Osteomyelitis in the Diabetic Foot: Importance of the Histopathologic Margin

Background

Diabetes mellitus affects up to 14% of Americans. Infection of the diabetic foot is a common complication, which may lead to amputation. If infection extends to involve bone, the risk of amputation is increased 4-fold. Presence of osteomyelitis at the histopathologic margin of resection portends a poor prognosis in osteomyelitis outside the setting of the diabetic foot. We aimed to assess the association of a positive histopathologic margin with the outcome of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot.

Methods

Medical records were reviewed for all patients who underwent below-ankle amputation for osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot. Patients who had at least 1 year of follow-up, a histopathologic diagnosis of osteomyelitis, and a comment on whether the margin was involved were included.

Results

Thirty-nine of 66 (59%) cases had remission of osteomyelitis at 12 months. When comparing cases with remission with those who experienced recurrence in the 12 months of follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences in age, glycosylated hemoglobin, duration of antimicrobial therapy, Infectious Diseases Society of America class, or presence of osteomyelitis at the histopathologic margin. Among cases with a negative histopathologic margin, 29/48 (60.4%) were free of disease at 1 year, compared with 10/18 (55.6%) cases with a positive histopathologic margin (P = .72). Remission was significantly more frequent in cases undergoing amputation at the digit level (66.7%) compared with amputation at the metatarsal level (40.7%) (P = .045).

Conclusions

Osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot at the histopathologic margin of resection was not associated with increased risk of treatment failure. Resection at the level of the digit was associated with a lower risk of failure than at the metatarsal level.

Percutaneous image-guided bone biopsy of osteomyelitis in the foot and pelvis has a low impact on guiding antibiotics management: a retrospective analysis of 60 bone biopsies

OBJECTIVE

Image-guided percutaneous bone biopsy may be requested by clinicians to guide antibiotics management decisions in patients with extremity osteomyelitis. Much of the clinical literature describes a high rate of bone biopsy culture positivity in patients with osteomyelitis, but anecdotally biopsy is felt to be fairly low yield in many musculoskeletal radiology practices. The objective of the study is to determine the culture positivity rate and clinical utility of bone biopsy in guiding the management of patients with osteomyelitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All image-guided bone biopsy procedures of the pelvis or foot performed at a single institution were identified by a retrospective report search, and only those with a clinical suspicion for infection were included. Cases were included based on convincing imaging findings of osteomyelitis on retrospective review. Microbiology results were reviewed in the clinical chart, as were antibiotics management decisions and response to antibiotics therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 60 bone biopsies met the inclusion criteria, 25 within the foot and 35 biopsies of the pelvis. Overall, 11 out of 60 core biopsies (18%) yielded positive cultures. Antibiotics management was altered in only 27% patients with a positive culture; thus, only 5% of patients with MRI findings of osteomyelitis undergoing biopsy had an impact on management.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous bone biopsies may have a low rate of culture positivity, and even when positive, frequently do not have an impact on antibiotics choice. These data differ from much of the clinical literature, which describes a very high rate of culture positivity.